Today's leaders must have spent more time watching Star Trek than they did studying economics. That's the only way I can explain articles like this.

A coalition of education and political leaders wants to improve higher education in Arizona, arguing the state’s poor performance has contributed to the United States’ declining economic power.

Too few of the state’s residents are earning college degrees to keep high-paying jobs here, according to the Coalition for Solutions Through Higher Education. The group cites statistics indicating more high school freshmen drop out than go to college.

But the group has a plan.

The coalition hopes to accomplish such things by raising awareness of the problem. It is holding a series of meetings across the state and hopes to initiate legislative hearings on the issue early next year.

I'm sure the "awareness raising sessions" and "legislative hearings" will lead to a Blue Ribbon Panel and a white paper followed by a five part series in the Republic about how bad Arizona sucks and why we won't be able to compete with the Chinese in a few years because kids in school today will only be qualified to play the banjo.

Maybe I can save the group some time. Do you know why people aren't going to college? Because the very same intellectuals who are now gnashing their teeth...raised tuition so high that many college degrees are no longer economically justifiable.

The chart on the right tracks in state tuition since 1992. I got the data from the the Board of Regent's website and then put it into this graph. (click it to enlarge). Tuition has gone up 300% since 1992. See that big spike where it really started to accelerate? That's when Michael Crow took over ASU and decided it was going to be an A1 super duper research institution.

Shockingly, when the price of an education tripled...fewer people decided to attend college.

There's a word for that type of behavior... "rational." Economists actually assume that people act rationally, but people who grew up watching Star Trek and then went to work for the Government don't understand that incentives matter.

Degrees that once cost $10,000 made sense for an 18 year old who wanted to avoid truck driving school, but Psychology, History, Religious Studies, Political Science, English Lit, and Journalism to name a few have become uneconomic at $30,000.

It makes no sense to incur $30,000 to $50,000 in debt for a degree that has little or no economic value. Sure, a liberal arts education is a great background if you want to attend law school, but ASU accepts 160 of the 3,500 who apply. That's a pretty big gamble if your undergraduate degree is in Film Studies. Do you know how many Cappuccinoes you have to make to pay off a $30,000 debt? So students on the margin have made the rational decision to forgo college.

Now the same group who have priced students out of the market are lamenting that kids aren't attending college and they are going to hold "awareness sessions" to solve the problem.

If you want kids to attend college then you need to back the tuition down to a reasonable level and hire a President who makes $120,000 a year and wants to teach kids.

Or you can pay a University President $750,000 a year to implement his dream of an elite university on a hill. Crank up tuition and cater to the few thousand kids who can afford to attend.

But it's tough to do both...no matter how many awareness sessions you hold

Here's a story from today's Washington Times that's getting nationwide attention. Why haven't we read about this in the local papers? Let me guess, it involves the Global War On Terror and the Porous boarder with Mexico. Looks like fodder for page A 18 to me.

Islamic terrorists target Army base -- in ArizonaBy Sara A. CarterNovember 26, 2007 Fort Huachuca, the nation's largest intelligence-training center, changed security measures in May after being warned that Islamist terrorists, with the aid of Mexican drug cartels, were planning an attack on the facility.

Fort officials changed security measures after sources warned that possibly 60 Afghan and Iraqi terrorists were to be smuggled into the U.S. through underground tunnels with high-powered weapons to attack the Arizona Army base, according to multiple confidential law enforcement documents obtained by The Washington Times.

"A portion of the operatives were in the United States, with the remainder not yet in the United States," according to one of the documents, an FBI advisory that was distributed to the Defense Intelligence Agency, the CIA, Customs and Border Protection and the Justice Department, among several other law enforcement agencies throughout the nation. "The Afghanis and Iraqis shaved their beards so as not to appear to be Middle Easterners."

According to the FBI advisory, each Middle Easterner paid Mexican drug lords $20,000 "or the equivalent in weapons" for the cartel's assistance in smuggling them and their weapons through tunnels along the border into the U.S. The weapons would be sent through tunnels that supposedly ended in Arizona and New Mexico, but the Islamist terrorists would be smuggled through Laredo, Texas, and reclaim the weapons later.

A number of the Afghans and Iraqis are already in a safe house in Texas, the FBI advisory said.

Fort Huachuca, which lies about 20 miles from the Mexican border, has members of all four service branches training in intelligence and secret operations. About 12,000 persons work at the fort and many have their families on base.

Lt. Col. Matthew Garner, spokesman for Fort Huachuca, said details about the current phase of the investigation or security changes on the post "will not be disclosed."

"We are always taking precautions to ensure that soldiers, family members and civilians that work and live on Fort Huachuca are safe," Col. Garner said. "With this specific threat, we did change some aspects of our security that we did have in place."

According to the FBI report, some of the weapons associated with the plot have been smuggled through a tunnel from Mexico to the U.S.

The FBI report is based on Drug Enforcement Administration sources, including Mexican nationals with access to "sub-sources" in the drug cartels. The report's assessment is that the DEA's Mexican contacts have proven reliable in the past but the "sub-source" is of uncertain reliability.

According to the source who spoke with DEA intelligence agents, the weapons included two Milan anti-tank missiles, Soviet-made surface-to-air missiles, grenade launchers, long guns and handguns

"FBI Comment: The surface-to-air missiles may in fact be RPGs," the advisory stated, adding that the weapons stash in Mexico could include two or three more Milan missiles.

The Milan, a French-German portable anti-tank weapon, was developed in the 1970s and widely sold to militaries around the world, including Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Insurgents in Iraq reportedly have used a Milan missile in an attack on a British tank. Iraqi guerrillas also have shot down U.S. helicopters using RPGs, or rocket-propelled grenades.

FBI spokesman Paul Bresson would not elaborate on the current investigation regarding the threat, but said that many times the initial reports are based on "raw, uncorroborated information that has not been completely vetted." He added that this report shows the extent to which all law enforcement and intelligence agencies cooperate in terror investigations.

"If nothing else, it provides a good look at the inner working of the law-enforcement and intelligence community and how they work together on a daily basis to share and deal with threat information," Mr. Bresson said. "It also demonstrates the cross-pollination that frequently exists between criminal and terrorist groups.

The connections between criminal enterprises, such as powerful drug cartels, and terrorist organizations have become a serious concern for intelligence agencies monitoring the U.S.-Mexico border.

"Based upon the information provided by the DEA handling agent, the DEA has classified the source as credible," stated a Department of Homeland Security document, regarding the possibility of an attack on Fort Huachuca. "The identity of the sub-source has been established; however, none of the information provided by the sub-source in the past has been corroborated."

The FBI advisory stated the "sub-source" for the information "is a member of the Zetas," the military arm of one of Mexico's most dangerous drug-trafficking organizations, the Gulf Cartel. The Gulf Cartel controls the movement of narcotics from Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, into the U.S. along the Laredo corridor.

However, the sub-source "for this information is of unknown reliability," the FBI advisory stated.

According to the DEA, the sub-source identified Mexico's Sinaloa cartel as the drug lords who would assist the terrorists in their plot.

This led the DEA to caution the FBI that its information may be a Gulf Cartel plant to bring the U.S. military in against its main rival. The Sinaloa and Gulf cartels have fought bloody battles along the border for control of shipping routes into the U.S.

"It doesn't mean that there isn't truth to some of what this source delivered to U.S. agents," said one law-enforcement intelligence agent, on the condition of anonymity. "The cartels have no loyalty to any nation or person. It isn't surprising that for the right price they would assist terrorists, knowingly or unknowingly."

Real Clear Politics has some insight on the long-term effects of the Nation's growth patterns. We've long known that the red states are growing faster economically, that conservatives have more children and that Americans are moving from blue states to red states in droves. The next reapportionment will increase the clout of the red states in both Congress and the Electoral College.

The obvious question is whether or not the new residents will be assimilated into the red states, or if they will tip the balance and turn them into swing, or even blue states. Arizona is certainly bluer than it was 10 years ago, but it's still redder than it was 20 years ago.

Here's the article. On the other hand, Democrats own all ten of the fastest-shrinking Congressional Districts. The regions are heavily biased toward the Midwest and Northeast, where an aging population and a waning industrial base are hurting growth. All ten districts are based around urban areas, many of which are hemorrhaging population to suburbs.

Population Shifts Toward GOP

The new Almanac of American Politics is out, and statistics within the Bible for political junkies show a rapidly changing American political landscape. Population, statistics show, is draining from the Midwest and Northeast and pouring into southern, sunnier states. It will take a decade for the results to be evident, but one thing is sure: With changes as rapid as these, the electoral college math in 2012 will be dramatically different from what it is in 2008.

Of the ten fastest-growing districts in America, not one cast their ballots for John Kerry in 2004. All but one, Rep. Nick Lampson's Texas 22 seat, are held by Republicans, and Lampson, some will argue, is only back in Congress because his opponent didn't have her name on the ballot. Lampson is a top target of House Republicans next year and looks to be in serious danger.

But the nine other seats are not all safely Republican. Rep. Jon Porter will face a strong challenge in Nevada 03, the Las Vegas suburbs, while Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, of Florida's 5th District, represents a district that held a Democrat at the beginning of the decade. Arizona Reps. Jeff Flake and Trent Franks come in at numbers one and two, and new residents of the state have registered overwhelmingly Democratic, according to the East Valley Tribune. Neither Flake nor Franks are in immediate danger, but a generation from now, the districts will not look the same as they do today.

The fastest-growing Congressional Districts between 2000 and 2005, with change percentage:

On the other hand, Democrats own all ten of the fastest-shrinking Congressional Districts. The regions are heavily biased toward the Midwest and Northeast, where an aging population and a waning industrial base are hurting growth. All ten districts are based around urban areas, many of which are hemorrhaging population to suburbs.

None of the districts are in any real danger of going Republican -- save Rep. Julia Carson's Indianapolis-based 7th District, which is only in danger because of a perennially weak incumbent -- but if states and districts fail to keep pace with the rest of the nation's growth, Democratic seats will have to be cut during the 2010 redistricting.

The ten fastest-shrinking districts, with percentage of population lost between 2000 and 2005:

If I target someone in a post and they respond in the comment section, I generally move their comments into the main body of the blog so they have an equal footing. The Tribune's Le Templar takes issue with my Mainstream Media Meltdown post. Here are his comments.

I also need to note that Greg continues to print an significant error in his discussion of the Tribune business model. We are adding free single-copy placement and free home delivery of our new local news section to our portfolio of products in some areas. But the Tribune is NOT replacing all paid subscriptions with free newspapers. If you pay for the full newspaper today, you will have to pay to receive the full newspaper tomorrow. (The free versions do not include sports, the nation/world section or other sections we include throughout the week.)

Management did make the hard decision to stop subscription delivery in some outlying areas as a move to better match delivery costs with subscription revenue. But our total number of paid subscriptions has remained remarkably steady despite all of the recent changes.Greg's statement that the Tribune has basically become the State Press with 70,000 papers is simply hogwash.

Craig's List is a great example of the unforeseen forces that are wiping out the newspaper industry. Classified ads used to be a cash cow for the newspaper. There was simply no alternative venue if you wanted to sell an old desk, hire an employee or advertise your yard sale.

Classified ads were once a multi billion dollar market. Who would have thought that one guy--Craig Newmark--would create a free service that is so superior that it wipes out the entire segment of the industry and perhaps tips the balance in the collapse of the industry itself.

Craig's list is free, searchable and easy to access on line. More importantly, Craig's List has the audience that used to read the paper. If you are choosing between Craig's list or paying for a help wanted ad, there's really no choice.

But what if you OWN the help wanted ads? What if you are the Arizona Republic and you are advertising for interns. Well, you have to resort to Craig's List.

The Arizona Republic is looking for a designer to work an 8-week internship through parts of January and February of 2008. As we ramp up our design projects for the upcoming Super Bowl, we need a person who can step in and do quality print work for us. We will train the candidate in CCI (our pagination system), and they would be working in the sports department of our downtown office.

My gosh, think about that. The Arizona Republic is looking for interns and has to advertise the position on Craig's List. That will give you some insight about the future of the industry.

The print media meltdown is happening so rapidly that I'm having trouble posting fast enough to keep up. Gannett stock hit another ten year low today. The stock is 30% below where it was trading on this date in 1997. The chart below tracks the Dow and compares it to Gannett stock over the last 5 years. As you can see, Gannett is down 50% and the DOW is up 50%.

Meanwhile, the Tribune's subscription numbers have collapsed in the wake of management's decision to start giving the paper away.

The East Valley Tribune's drop was even more severe. Sunday circulation dropped 11.4 percent to 70,025, down from 79,066; weekday circulation dropped 16.8 percent to 82,951, down from 99,711; while Saturday circulation decreased 13.8 percent to 78,725 from 91,381, compared to six months ago.

Frankly, it's hard to see how the Tribune survives for another year. It has a mainstream media cost structure and New Times distribution structure. Subscription totals will continue to plummet as individual subscriptions expire.

The transition to a free paper will serve as a double whammy. Advertising rates are built on a multiple of paid subscriptions. As the subscription number falls, the advertising rate collapses exponentially. Additionally, advertisers don't value a free newspaper as much as they do a traditional subscription paper, so the overall multiple will fall even faster.

The Tribune, with a free daily distribution of some 70,000 units, is now the functional equivalent of the State Press. But the State Press, of course, is written by Journalism Students who are hoping to leverage their experience into a $9 an hour internship with the Republic. My guess is that the Tribune doesn't enjoy a similar cost structure.

This is no temporary setback; the Tribune no longer has a viable business model.

The local lefty bloggers are trying to produce a little pre-election spin by proclaiming that the Republican field in CD 5 is somehow weak or second tier.

Here's Tedski's version. I’d suggest that at Harry Mitchell's re-election party next year, they serve toast.

Tedski refers to this Wacktivist post. So far the rag-tag GOP field resembles a group of misfits at the circus freak show more than it does a field of top tier Congressional candidates.

Such transparent pre-race spin would normally not merit a response, but I realized that the local MSM reporters are so new that they might actually buy the ruse.

The real story is that Mitchell, although formidable, is widely perceived as one of the most vulnerable incumbents in the nation and has drawn a field of opponents that is stronger than generally vie for an OPEN seat.

The 2006 race to replace Kolbe in CD 8 is a great example. Giffords, Weiss, Graf, Hellon and Huffman had nowhere near the resumes of Anderson, Hatch-Miller, Knaperek and Schweikert.

Indeed, although they have become prominent national figures in their own right, Kyl, Shadegg and McCain didn't initially have the experience that the Republicans in CD 5 can boast.

Here's the field. Decide for yourself.

Mark Anderson served 8 years in the State House of Representatives before being elected to the State Senate where he Chaired the Family Services Committee. He was then re-elected to the House and Chairs the Education Committee. So he will have served 12 years in the Legislature and Chaired two major committees.

Laura Knaperek served a total of 10 years in the House of Representatives. She Chaired the House Appropriations Committee as well as the House Higher Education Committee. As Tempe turned more Democratic she lost her seat, but that shouldn't be seen as a disadvantage. A Republican will beat Mitchell by convincing Republican voters to vote for a Republican candidate. Many of those potential defectors are in Tempe. She also has the advantage of being the only woman in the race.

Jeff Hatch-Miller served four years in the State House Representatives where he Chaired the House Committee on Energy Utilities and Technology. In 2002, he was elected to the Arizona Corporation Commission. He was re-elected in 2004. His status as a state wide office holder means that his name has appeared on every ballot in CD 5 in two different elections.

David Schweikert served four years in the Arizona House of Representatives and was chosen as House Republican Whip when he was just 30. He ran for the CD 5 seat in 1994 and came in second to Hayworth. He's essentially been running ever since. He served 10 years as Director of the State Board of Equalization for Symington and Hull. In 2004 he was elected Maricopa County Treasurer by a 21 point margin. During the campaign and first year of office, he earned his WP Carey MBA on the weekends. Like Hatch-Miller, Schweikert's name has been on every ballot and signs have been in every precinct in CD 5. His old legislative district covered all of Scottsdale and Fountain Hills and is completely contained in CD 5.

Jim Ogsbury is running too and he's a really nice guy.

So Who's Going to Win the Primary?

My problem is that I'm friends with all of the candidates so I have trouble being impartial. I've known Anderson and Knaperek for many years and they are wonderful. Hatch-Miller and I have worked closely on a lot of issues while he has been at the ACC and we represented the same district in the House. Schweikert and I have been friends for nearly 20 years. We've played about a thousand games of Racquetball, hiked the Grand Canyon 3 or 4 times and I was best man at his wedding.

They are all first-tier candidates and any of them is capable of beating Mitchell. Based solely on the credentials that I've listed above, I think the primary would be too close to call.

However there's one huge event that was announced this afternoon and tips the balance. The Club for Growth officially endorsed Schweikert.

Today, the Club for Growth PAC endorsed former Maricopa County Treasurer and State Representative David Schweikert in Arizona’s Fifth Congressional District race.

In the State Legislature, Schweikert was a taxpayer hero. As the majority whip, he was instrumental in passing across-the-board income tax cuts and corporate income tax cuts. On spending, Schweikert has been a strong supporter of a Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights amendment and voted against his own leadership on various budget measures when he objected to excessive spending. Schweikert is also devoted to free trade, tort reform, and free-market reform of entitlement programs. David Schweikert is clearly the most pro-growth candidate in the field.

Why is that so significant? Because the Club for Growth has serious money, plays serious hard ball and most importantly does so in Primaries.

The primary tactic of the separate Club for Growth PAC is to provide financial support from Club members to viable pro-growth candidates to Congress, particularly in Republican primaries.

The Club for Growth's endorsement typically adds well over $100,000 to the challenger's coffers, but in Sharron Angle's Nevada race and Tim Walberg's Michigan race, Club members contributed over $600,000. However the real boost comes from the Club's tendency to fund independent ads that are critical of the voting records of the other Republican candidates in the field.

Schweikert has the fire in the belly--he resigned from the Treasurer's Office in order to run full time. He has the experience; he has plenty of money and now he has the Club for Growth behind him. I think he's the one who survives the Primary.

And Mitchell? Mitchell is not to be underestimated. He has an outstanding political resume and is a ruthless campaigner--just ask Gary Richardson where all his signs went. But George Bush won CD 5 by 17 points. The 2006 election was the mother of all perfect storms. Napolitano was on the ballot, turnout for Gubernatorial elections is lower than presidential elections. Jim Pederson spent a ton of money on get out the vote efforts and as much of the vote was backlash against JD as it was support of Mitchell.

Those factors are gone. That's why you are seeing the strongest Republican field that the state has ever seen.

(The Politico) The anti-tax Club for Growth issued an early endorsement in a still-developing GOP primary for the right to challenge freshman Rep. Harry Mitchell (R-Ariz.).

They endorsed Maricopa County Treasurer Dave Schweikert, who is facing four other announced candidates for the September primary. His leading primary rival is poised to be former state Rep. Laura Knaperek. State Rep. Mark Anderson and lobbyist Jim Ogsbury have also announced their candidacies.

I was listening to Radio Campesina 88.3 this morning on the drive in and there was a commercial that told callers to call Senator McCain's office and urge him to vote yes on the guest worker provisions of the Agriculture bill.

Spanish talk radio is famous for these campaigns. When I was chief of staff for the State Senate, Pete Rios was trying to build up pressure for his bill to give driver licenses to illegal aliens and the local Spanish stations were urging listeners to call the Senate President's office. We had no warning that we would be receiving thousands of calls from Spanish speakers and the traffic essentially shut down the Senate President's phones. That's not especially productive, but Rios and Radio Campesina probably thought it was funny.

We eventually re-routed the President's phone to someone who spoke Spanish and could handle the call traffic.

However, before we could make the transfer, we needed an interim solution. So I answered the President's phones. "La Migra. ¿En qué puedo servirle?" That means "Immigration Department, How may I help you."